appwrite_list_messages

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. Implies read-only operation via 'List' but fails to mention pagination, rate limits, required permissions, or whether draft messages include unsent scheduled messages. '[UNIFIED]' suggests unified messaging interface but provides no behavioral context for what that means.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence is appropriately brief, but '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be implementation metadata leaking into the description rather than useful context. The extreme brevity crosses into under-specification given the lack of schema documentation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With zero annotation coverage, 0% schema descriptions, three parameters, and no output schema, the description needed to provide significant compensatory context. It fails to document parameters, return structure, pagination, or filtering capabilities, leaving critical gaps in the tool contract.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% with no descriptions for 'site', 'queries', or 'search'. The description adds zero parameter context—doesn't explain that 'site' likely refers to Appwrite project ID, or what query syntax/format is expected for the queries parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States specific action (List) and resource (messages) with scope (sent and draft). Distinguishes from sibling get_message by implying collection vs single item. However, '[UNIFIED]' prefix is unexplained metadata noise, and it doesn't clarify whether this covers emails, SMS, push notifications, or all types despite send_email/push/sms siblings existing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus appwrite_get_message or other messaging tools. No mention of pagination behavior for 'all messages' or filtering capabilities despite having 'queries' and 'search' parameters.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.